Why no skimmer?

"...it makes more sence that the natural way is best. not to mention the fact that the skimmer takes out stuff your tank needs... but isn't it harder on the fish if you dont have a skimmer? How do you keep up with the bio load?"
    - PM from a WMAS Guest


I've been running skimmerless since 1998. In that time I've probably had 6 or 7 tanks and helped set up at least that many more. In my experience and observation of hundreds of tanks, it seems that fish do not care whether there is a skimmer or not. If I understand the use of the term "bioload", the major difference between using a skimmer and not using one is the amount and health of the SPS coral, but even that is subject to other conditions and filtration components as discussed below.

While it's really personal choice whether to use a skimmer or not, here are my reasons for going skimmerless:

It's my understanding that by not using a skimmer, the food that is left in the water allows more living things, such as some soft and LPS coral and micro-invertebrates to grow. Some of these then become food for coral and larger animals...the ones we see and enjoy.

The chemical compounds which a skimmer removes, in addition to those a skimmer cannot remove, and which cannot be used by organisms in the reef aquarium, can be removed in 2 ways,
1)activated carbon and
2)a Refugium.

Activated carbon removes many organic compounds including some that a skimmer cannot remove. In my ~120 system I use a cup of AC in a bag next to the refugium return pump for a week or two about once each month.

A Refugium is certainly not necessary, but provides many benefits to a thriving reef aquarium. I grow algae in the refugium which includes Cheatomorpha, Caulerpa, Cyanobacteria and Mangrove trees. I keep a few snails for cleanup and many micro-inverts make their home in the Refugium as well.

To be honest, the absence of a skimmer has drawbacks. For one, Cyanobacteria grows much easier in the main tank, because a temporary increase of nutrients contributes to Cyano growth rather than being removed by a skimmer. Secondly, SPS Coral, which requires more nutrient-free water seems to grow slower in a system without an effective skimmer.

Does this all make sense?

Your reasoning makes sense, but I still think it is crazy (or at least inappropriate) to advise someone to not use a skimmer. 
I was talked out of skimmers years ago by our club presidency.  I wish they hadn't told me their reasons for not using skimmers because it took me 5 years to realize that I would have been better off using one.

Adam

I agree with both Shane and Adam.

Can you have a nice tank without a skimmer?  Definitely

Can you have a better tank with one?  I think so.

Do what Shane said, go and look at a whole bunch of tanks.  See if they use a skimmer or not and why.  Then make a decision.

I have run both types of aquariums in the last 6 months.

One point is obvious, you need to have filtration.  If you choose not to use a skimmer plan on doing more water changes, and manually removing the oil gunk that will build up on the surface on the water.

If you plan to use a skimmer, plan on adding a few nutrients back in to the water.

My tank did quite well with out a skimmer, but I cleaned off the surface of the water twice a week, and did weekly water changes of about 10% volume.  I also had a nice HOB filter that ran carbon.  (I was running a 40 gallon tank and on HOB filter that ran 400 gph)

I have since switched to sump, a sock, and two carbon bags with a skimmer, the sps and mushroom growth I think are better then they were before, also I have switched tanks, and location of the tank, so I can't say that it is all due to the skimmer, but I think that it helps.

 

 

Are we getting ahead of the discussion for next months meeting?

I have no idea.  That is up to Jake.

As for your other questions.  Well I could be wrong.  But years ago Mark talked me out of skimmers, and I sold the 3 I had.  I wish I hadn't.  I want one on my tank.  They are most definately not necessary, and I don't think you could ever argue that they are.  But what a safety net.  When you get toxic chemicals in the tank from allelopathy, or when your puffer dies (like in my tank), or if you just like to add lots of food- you are almost asking for trouble.  So why risk it?
I also agree with Jake's philosophy in that you should get a huge skimmer, then just turn it down.  That way if something goes wrong you can always turn it up. 

I also think that Mark's advise is bad for two more reasons.  1) maybe you don't want your tank to look like Mark's tank.  Maybe you think he has a junky looking tank.  If that is the case (with any tank you see) then don't listen to that person.  2) this advise is not going to experienced hobbyists, but to everyone.  In that case you can't expect people to know and see the little things like Mark can.  So in general it is just more safe to use a skimmer.

Adam

Thanks for the comments!  I love this about having met you all now, its like a family!  Mark - don't feel picked on, you have the best frag tank I've seen!

 

Jody

Adam Blundell wrote: ...it took me 5 years to realize that...

A little slow are we?

I did no skimmer on my 24 gallon for over 2 years with no problems. I kept SPS and they all did great. I did do a lot of water changes though.

My 180 has no skimmer and it scares me. Water changes are a lot harder and more expensive and I plan on doing less of them. I may be setting myself up for disaster.

I love hang on filters. 

Adam

I used a biowheel on a 24 gallon. I took the wheel off and just used  the filter inserts. It removed a lot of debris from the water and gave me a place to put activated carbon. I think they are a good alternative to sumps if you cant have one. The high water flow and concealed location makes it perfect for activated carbon. They also create good surface agitation. 

But if you have a sump, I dont see much use for them.